Landing fees are again under consideration at Vance Brand Municipal Airport in Longmont, Colorado, less than a year after the city council rejected a proposal to charge aircraft $5 per 1,000 pounds of landing weight. Following a new rates study, council voted 4-3 in July to direct staff to return with a broader rates-and-charges schedule aimed at improving the airport’s financial sustainability.
Revenue Options
The Bolton & Menk study found the airport’s existing lease rates slightly below those at comparable airports and concluded they were insufficient for long-term financial sustainability. Vance Brand is federally obligated to maintain a fee structure that makes the airport as self-sustaining as possible. Its current fee schedule includes ground leases and a 6-cent-per-gallon fuel flowage fee, but no landing fee.
The study modeled a charge of $2 per 1,000 pounds of landing weight. It estimated that fee would produce about $162,195 annually after collection costs if based aircraft were exempt, or roughly $237,690 if based aircraft were included. Bolton & Menk also recommended increases to ground leases and fuel flowage fees.
Landing Fees Reconsidered
“Phenomenal revenue generators” is how Bolton & Menk representative Paul Anslow described landing fees during the council meeting, according to Longmont Brief, though he also cautioned that they can be controversial and lead to lawsuits.
The council’s 4-3 vote came after city staff disclosed a spreadsheet error in the financial projections used in the study. The city’s budget manager said the corrected figures showed the airport fund declining faster than originally presented, but that the study’s revenue recommendations remained valid. No landing fee has been adopted, and the amount, exemptions and other details would require further council action.
I attended the City Council meeting which ran to 1:30am.
The spreadsheet error was disclosed at 1:15am after the revenue enhancing proposal was delivered. The large error showed that the airport fund would decline SLOWER than originally presented (not faster). It negated the entire premise of the study which was predicated on a looming “financial cliff” that urgently needed to be addressed by immediate rate hikes and landing fees.
Despite this material last minute change to the underlying pro forma, the council voted to proceed.
This sequence of events clearly demonstrated ulterior anti-airport motives and will surely lead to costly litigation if the council proceeds.
Thank you for covering this issue which is relevant to all GA airports struggling to survive.